Forum:Some wāpuro cleanup
:Neither? I don't see the problem with keeping them as is. Even if we use wapuro, it should never interfere with how the word is actually pronounced. Lanate (talk) 23:44, November 2, 2012 (UTC) ::If there's one thing I'm obstinate on, it's the romanization method we've been using before. I don't see what's wrong with what we had before. I don't like the use of macrons, I don't see what the problem with doubling the vowel for long vowels is, the x looks even worse. ::I can tick off what we've--or at least, what I've mostly been assuming--from this list. ::*Hepburn for basic kana ::*Wāpuro for long vowels ::*Use n' but drop the apostrophe in non-ambiguous cases for 'n' ::*Double the previous consonant for small tsu ::*Double the vowel for katakana long vowels ::*Favor phonetics but preserve wo for particles ::*Space between words, including particles for spaces ::*Use hypens for closely related works (like -mura or O-) ::*Capitalization like in English, except for loseless for song lyrics ::*Convert back to original spelling for foreign words ::*Small vowels for small kana ::It's going to take me a lot to deviate from this list. Lanate (talk) 02:57, November 3, 2012 (UTC) :::I may have a different word processor, but I'm able to get the correct kana without using "x" or "l" on both Microsoft Word and WWWJDIC. :::I personally prefer wapuro the most in the cases that it removes ambiguity in spelling, like with "e", "o", "wa", and "ou", or stuff like "Tao/Tamashii" instead of "Dao/Damashii". If we're going to have to do a whole list of non-intuitive changes to keep using wapuro...then I'll give up on supporting wapuro, because those are pretty much the main reasons I thought it was useful. I apologize for my wishywashiness on this, though. 07:20, November 3, 2012 (UTC) lists the basic rules of how it works, and I don't see what's all that thing about "Hepburn relies in tradition" that KrytenKoro keeps telling me. I'm pretty sure the rules listed there are universal. The only things I see as ugly and disgusting in Hepburn are "ん is m before p and b" and "っち is tchi". I don't see the basis for the first one, and while I understand the second, I see it as an unneeded difference, as anyone should be able to guess it works the same way as any other use of sokuon, but I'll accept using them if we go with Hepburn. If we create our own romanization system, well, the only things I would do different from Hepburn are: *Taking out those two afore-mentioned disgusting things. *Try to figure out a way of visually indicating that "を" is different from "お" and "ウォ", like using "ö", and probably doing something similar what the "は" and "へ" particles. *Using "dzu" for "づ" and "dji" for "ぢ". Now, what's our decision? 23:29, November 3, 2012 (UTC)—Last revision at 23:30, November 3, 2012 (UTC)}} :There's also ambiguity in macrons. I just... I really don't like it; macrons bother me in text. If I get overruled, I get overruled, but this is what I'm saying and anything else will be under protest. Ambiguities can be resolved via the same stop (') we use for n. As for other issues, we've been using the conversion to English or appropriate text for our attacks, which is why it was in use for the rest of the wiki. :I'm more comfortable coming up with our own romanization system based on Hepburn, but we're going to clash again and again on macrons as we have different paradigms in mind for romanization. I'm not looking for a lossless romanization system; we can all agree that it looks ugly no matter what. But I'm holding for pronunciation-based information, because I believe that's what matters in the end. Lanate (talk) 04:50, November 7, 2012 (UTC) ::I'm not sure I actually understand what you're arguing. Could you post a few examples of contentious romanizations with how you'd like them to be done? 04:56, November 7, 2012 (UTC) :::It's just me bitching about how I don't like macrons. I like writing it out according to the kana, and the choonpu with doubled letters. Any sort of ambiguities between the above could use a stop like we do with n followed by a vowel: "真新しい" would be (ma'atarashii). Lanate (talk) 05:43, November 7, 2012 (UTC) :If we're committing to something wholesale, I'd like to know what exact romanizations we're changing to and from; I've lost track of the discussion in that regard. 19:48, November 9, 2012 (UTC)